MANUEL PEDRO, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1973-12-21
No. 73-612
Before BARKDULL, C. J., and PEARSON and HAVERFIELD, JJ.
287 So. 2d 397 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1973) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Topics
Speedy Trial Right Burden Of Proof

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Speedy Trial Right cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant pleaded nolo contendere to a charge of breaking and entering a dwelling with intent to commit grand larceny. He was arrested on July 26, 1971, hut thereafter failed to appear for trial and was later served with an alias capias on December. 6, 1972 in the Broward County Jail. He was brought to trial on April 16, 1973. The question raised on this appeal is whether the court erred in denying a motion for discharge pursuant to the speedy trial rule presented to the trial court on April 16, 1973. The defendant claimed discharge pursuant to Rule 3.191(b)(1), CrPR, 33 F.S.A. We hold that the trial court correctly found that the defendant had not cárried the burden imposed by Rule 3.191(e), CrPR, 33 F.S.A., which states that the accused “ . . . must by competent proof establish continuous availability”. In this case, the appellant suggested that an assistant state’s attorney must have known of his whereabouts because of matters not reflected in the record. This was not sufficient.

Affirmed.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Montalvo v. State, 323 So. 2d 674 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
    …t having failed to appear at the arraignment, the burden devolved upon him to establish at the hearing on his motion for discharge by competent proof his continuous availability for trial pursuant to RCrP 3.191(e).1 See Pedro v. State, Fla.App.1973, 287 So. 2d 397. There being absent from the record the proceedings and arguments of counsel presented to the trial court at the October 18 hearing on appellant’s motion to dismiss, we cannot determine whether appellant proved his availability for trial and whethe…
  • McCREE v. State, 365 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See: Kennedy v. McCauley, 265 So. 2d 547 (Fla.4th DCA 1972); Dam v. State, 278 So. 2d 334 (Fla.3d DCA 1973); Pedro v. State, 287 So. 2d 397 (Fla.3d DCA 1973); Smith v. Nesbitt, 355 So. 2d 202 (Fla.3d DCA 1978).…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw